Jump to content
Talk Sox
  • Create Account

Maxbialystock

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    21,172

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

 Content Type 

Profiles

Boston Red Sox Videos

2026 Boston Red Sox Top Prospects Ranking

Boston Red Sox Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

Guides & Resources

2025 Boston Red Sox Draft Pick Tracker

News

2026 Boston Red Sox Draft Tracker: Picks & Bonuses

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by Maxbialystock

  1. Maxbialystock
    Getting picked off at 3B can't be blamed on the manager. 3b coach, maybe.
  2. Maxbialystock
    ERod does have breaking pitches, changeup and slider. Unfortunately, both are very unreliable. As you say, he relies on the fastball because he can't control the slider or changeup.
  3. Maxbialystock
    So Young moves up to batting fifth and his hitless in 3 at bats. The simple fact--documented--is that with this lineup it almost makes no difference where you bat if you want to be productive. Betts has a low OBP, but leads the the team comfortably in runs scored and as lead off hitter--the guy following the 7th, 8th, and 9th batters--is second on the the team in rbi's. Speaking of which, Bradley had more rbi's when he batted 8th and 9th than he does batting 5th. Was that a dinger I just saw HanRam hit to give the Sox the lead? My, my. Bosoxmal sure can call them.
  4. Maxbialystock
    If you take umpires out of calling balls and strikes, you have effectively put them on the sidelines. Balls and strikes are uniquely central to the game of baseball. I love your point about "the outrage if the 1b ump missed 13% of the plays at 1B." I love it because everybody watching games on TV knows that umpires miss calls on balls and strikes--call it 13% of the time if you will--and there has been no public outcry because it's an expected part of the game. As I keep saying, missed calls on balls and strikes do not prevent good pitchers from getting hitters out and bad pitchers from getting hit.
  5. Maxbialystock
    I think Ortiz is relatively clean, but my opinion means nothing. I will continue to rely on the sportswriters who vote on HOF candidates for the final judgment. I think they have so far done a good job of weeding out the worst offenders. Let us not forget that most of those who are losing out on the HOF still made a ton of money made possible in part by the use of PED's. Back to the thread subject. I would like to introduce a simple thought about a "realistic view" of this year's team. And that thought came from others on other threads: this team seems to be running out of steam, some would even call it a "June swoon" because the Sox have a losing record this month. For awhile the problem seemed to be primarily pitching, especially the starters, but lately the lineup also seems to be struggling.
  6. Maxbialystock
    I would need to read something definitive on your a and b. As for c, I think the DH is moot because the NL eschews it. The playoffs are about money, nothing more, and hardly a refinement to the basic game. Heck, they were copies from the NFL, NBA, and NHL. Instant replay is a mixed blessing to me. Overall, it speeds up the game by preventing managers from racing onto the field every time they don't like a call. But instant replays also interrupt the flow of the game, and half the time they only confirm what the umpire called. As for you later point about goggles to assist umpires, I'm not so sure, but will at least reserve judgment.
  7. Maxbialystock
    I said I didn't watch all the pitches, so maybe I missed the bad calls. Even if I had seen them, however, I would have said the same thing: we lost and Chicago won because of the players, not the umpire behind the plate. If none of us had watched the game and were simply told that Chicago and Sales beat Boston and Buchholz 3-1, most of us would have said, "it was that close? Was Buchholz lucky? Why can't our guys hit Chicago pitching. This is the second game in a row of weak hitting." No one, but no one would have said, "that score had to be because of the home plate umpire." If we assume--as you assert--that the home plate umpire was terrible, I would offer this game as solid evidence that umpires do not prevent good pitchers from getting players out nor bad pitchers from getting hit because that's exactly what happened tonight. Despite bad calls the better pitcher won.
  8. Maxbialystock
    Sales is now 12-2 with an ERA of 2.83. Tonight he had 9 K's and 1 BB and gave up 1 run and 4 hits in 7 innings. Buchholz wasn't great, but was better than he has been. If he could only take back his first two pitches, he might have had a really good night.
  9. Maxbialystock
    My reading comprehensive and interpretative skills are doing fine, thanks. If the Red Sox had won this game 3-1, there would have been very few complaints about calls of balls and strikes. Indeed, there would have been unrestrained jubilation if Buchholz had beat Sales. It absolutely, positively is about the Red Sox. And, I should admit, that's human nature and even, to a degree, commendable. Nothing wrong with rooting for the home team and getting mad at the umps. It's been going on for 150 years.
  10. Maxbialystock
    I like that. He probably should have pinch hit Ortiz for Ramirez, but nobody on the Sox is getting clutch hits in this series. And no one on the Sox can bunt worth a s***. No one. How many teams have a player who can put down such a piss poor bunt that it turns into a double play? The Sox do not teach, coach, or emphasize bunting--almost certainly because of Bill James and sabermetrics.
  11. Maxbialystock
    Chris Sale is vastly overrated as a starter. He just has those home plate umpires in his pocket like they were loose change. Meanwhile Clay Buchholz, one of the best starters ever to grace the Red Sox uniform, just couldn't catch a break from that really terrible home plate umpire.
  12. Maxbialystock
    Another game in which our guys played great but the umpires and our own manager conspired to take the game away and just hand it over to the totally undeserving White Sox. It's just a shame.
  13. Maxbialystock
    Probably won't happen. Better to just stop watching games and write protest letters to the Commish.
  14. Maxbialystock
    While I generally agree HanRam isn't hitting that well with an OPS hovering around .700, I think this is the wrong night to blame the loss on the manager. The whole lineup has looked anemic with 1 double, 5 singles and 0 for 6 with RISP.
  15. Maxbialystock
    Well, I stand corrected. The Red Sox played great tonight and got beat by the homeplate umpire. I can't wait to read the headlines in the paper or on the internet tomorrow: "s***** umps cost the sterling Red Sox another bitter loss. When will this nightmare of injustice, inaccuracy, and perversion end? MLB desperately needs robots calling the games."
  16. Maxbialystock
    This game was almost over after the first two pitches, a first pitch dinger followed by a first pitch double which led to Chicago's second run. Since then the score has been 1-1--except that Chicago started with a 2 run lead and a very good starter on the mound.
  17. Maxbialystock
    I haven't watched every pitch, but what I've seen says he has done pretty well. We are not losing because of the umpire, that's a certainty. We are losing because Chicago's pitching overmatches our hitting and because Buchholz so far this year is just a so-so pitcher and gave up 3 runs in I think 5 innings.
  18. Maxbialystock
    Sad part is that our lineup is struggling. Second night in a row the top five hitters have managed just 1 hit even though we still have the 8th and 9th innings left tonight. Sad part is that last night we had 3 on and 0 out last night in the 9th and couldn't get a run home. Pedroia struck out on a fast ball right down the middle.
  19. Maxbialystock
    Thanks. Now I begin to understand where this venom directed toward umpires comes from--the irrational belief that they are being unfair to our guys, which is just nonsense. One of us has already said he will stop watching a game if he sees the ump being unfair to our players.
  20. Maxbialystock
    I didn't hate him, but had you said so back then, I would probably have said I could feel your pain. And of course we were both wrong. He was good at LA and he was more than good after tommy john surgery, like he had a new lease on life. He was terrific in 2013 and one of the keys to winning it all. Wasn't he the one who beat Verlander in a crucial 1-0 game in the ALCS?
  21. Maxbialystock
    If they can't see it, how is the average ump accurate 87% of the time and some of them accurate almost all the time? There are no blind people driving, by the way, and anyone who hits a mailbox does so for other reasons besides vision. You want to know what blindness is? It's wanting to change the fundamental nature of baseball because of what we see on the TV screen. You guys need to grow up and recognize that baseball needs umpires not robots.
  22. Maxbialystock
    And you accuse me of exaggerating. sk7326 similes about umpires are way over the top. If the data are true--and I'm not sure they are--the umpires are 87% accurate, and we don't know that that is a fair percentage because there should be grey area around the strike zone where a ball or a strike could fairly be called. As for the 3D model, what is it using to define the top and bottom of the strike zone? But my real point remains the same. Umpires have been calling balls and strikes for 150 years without damaging the game. Indeed, to any true baseball fan, they are an essential part of the game even when they make mistakes. If they are 87% accurate, that's pretty good. Given the new methods of providing feedback, they could get even better. Better that than sending them to the trash heap.
  23. Maxbialystock
    Helping them is one thing. They already get lots of feedback on every call they make. What you guys want to do is relegate them to the outhouse. And how can you be so certain that umpires are ignoring the rule book just because you don't like their calls? They all know where the strike zone is even though the strike zone in my opinion is ill-defined because it changes for each player. We think the bottom of the zone is the knee, but what part of the knee? And where is the top of the zone? Armpits? And how do we know those computerized images are adjusted precisely to every player's size and stance?
  24. Maxbialystock
    Knock it off. You make me feel like the nattering nabob of negativism. You're over last night, and I'm still recovering.
  25. Maxbialystock
    Actually, good for you. I'm not quite ready to pray for Buch, but I agree he needs help. The good news is he flat earned this return because he was pretty good his last time out in 2+ innings of relief. Right now I'm about equally concerned with our hitting, which definitely seems to be backsliding.
×
×
  • Create New...